Gujarat High Court quashes FIRs against men booked for creating Telegram group on pay hike for police constables

The Gujarat High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings against three men who were accused of criminal conspiracy and attempting to cause alarm in public by creating a Telegram group to demand a pay increase and other service benefits for police constables [Kalpesh Vaghabhai Chaudhary v. State of Gujarat & Anr].1300 police constables were members of the group created in 2020. Justice Hasmukh D Suthar said mere creation of a group or joining of it by police personnel cannot be termed as conspiracy. The Court also found there to be no evidence to suggest meeting of minds of the accused, who did not know each other before."Nonetheless, merely to form a group and subsequently to join the said group by clicking the link or by any other means by the police personnel which were also admittedly unknown to the present petitioners and merely for volunteering themselves to join as member of the said group cannot be termed as conspiracy and it is sine qua non to conspire," the Court said..The Court explained that for invoking the charge of criminal conspiracy, there must be an agreement between two persons to do any illegal act. It also observed that the demand for police personnel was a legitimate demand and cannot in any manner be termed as illegal "Hence, question does not arise to invoke the provisions of section 120(B) of the IPC against the present petitioners. Herein, no act or allegation in the FIRs which discloses or suggests that the petitioner intended to cause fear or alarm to the public at large," the Court said in verdict passed on August 20 ..Further, the Court noted that to establish essential ingredients of the offence under Section 505 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the act must have the direct effect on the security of the State or public order. It also found there to be no act or allegation to disclose or suggest that the accused intended to cause fear or alarm to the public at large."Herein, neither the police personnel nor any other government employee have committed any offence against the State or public tranquility. Merely based on apprehension or assumption, the petitioners cannot be booked for an offence under Section 505(1)(B) of the IPC," the Court added. .In the present case, multiple FIRs had been filed against the accused (petitioners) under provisions of IPC, the Disaster Management Act, and the Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act, 1922.The FIRs were filed by police officials who alleged that the creation of this group and the circulation of related posts were done with the intent to cause alarm and breach public tranquility during the COVID-19 pandemic.It was argued by the State that the petitioners had nothing to do with the grade pay or police union and that they formed the group with the intent to create a separate class to cause alarm in general public..On the other hand, the petitioners argued that they have been falsely enroped in the present offence and that to express their views on the rights of the police by way of creating a group is not an offence. It was further submitted that the petitioners had circulated what many leaders and Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs) had written to the government regarding grant of several service benefits to police constables and no other posts had been made by them which could create a panic situation..Considering the arguments, the Court said there was no case of rumour mongering or any case to create fear or alarm between two groups or class of people by the accused."The act on the part of the petitioners even if taken at it is it is nothing but amounts to fair and bonafide demand or criticism of government. Except this, no any inference could be drawn hence, no any offence is culled out from the allegations leveled in the FIRs," it concluded..The Court also observed that there was no compulsion to join the group and even the complainant, who claimed that he was added to the group, had the option to abstain."The effect of the words must be judged from the standards of reasonable, strong-minded, firm and courageous men, and not those of weak and vacillating minds, nor of those who scent danger in every hostile point of view. Merely because message is spread, it cannot be termed that due to the said message, public tranquility is put in the peril and create fear in the minds of people and that too such police personnel having strong mind and being employee of disciplined department," it added.The Court found other offences also not made out in the case and thus quashed a total of five FIRs against the accused. .Advocate RB Thakore appeared for the petitioner Kalpesh Vaghabhai Chaudhary. State was represented by Public Prosecutor Hardik Dave and Additional Public Prosecutor Trupesh Kathiriya. .[Read Judgment].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.